Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
started the fire instead of trying to put the fire out. >> we tried to get change cpi, and harry reid took it off the table. and the president claims he wants change cpi, but is harry reid more powerful than barack obama? >> that's a good question. >> no, it's not. no, harry reid is not a more powerful guy. but i do agree in the end, if the president will stop demagoguing, and if he'll stop running a presidential campaign, a permanent campaign that david brooks is talking about, al, i think you're right. i think the president, at the end, may actually make some decisions that will upset his own base, change cpi, on hopefully -- hopefully he won't take paul krugman's position and say we'll worry about medicare in 2025 when it starts to melt down. hopefully he'll be a little more responsible than that. i think he will. >> yes. >> but the problem, i think, goes back to mika's point. in all of the attacking the president, he has a plan on the table. you can say is demagoguing. the revenues that he's putting on the table from the taxes add up. the republicans have just come back saying, we're n
was serious, he'd sit down with harry reid and begin to address our problems. >> you know, willie, it strikes me not only the white house but liberals for a decade now have said if republicans were serious about the deficit, they would cut defense spending and they would come forward with tax increases. well, it looks like, as mike was talking about yesterday in this new york article, republicans are going to come forward and let these defense cuts go through. so republicans will, over the past three months compromise in defense spending and compromise in tax increases. so i think it's fair at this point to say, mr. president, show us your hand, because this is what we've been hearing for a decade. taxes have gone up and now we're going to cut pretty significantly from the pentagon's budget. your move, mr. president. >> he wants revenues to go up again and john boehner's response is, we just did that. >> that's the thing. we always heard, you guys raise taxes, cut defense spending and then we will come back with a compromise on spending cuts. but, no, we raise taxes, we come forward with pent
in this process. you've got republican senators miffed at harry reid for not honoring the whole -- you have him having ripped on republicans. there are so many issues at play here. looks like he's going to get confirmed. and it's also an opportunity for republicans to ask some tough questions on benghazi, all of which haven't been answered yet. >> i want to go to something you said when we were together last time, which is you were concerned about his performance -- >> absolutely. >> and you can't help by wonder what bill cohen wonders, which is is he going to be a weak secretary? >> he didn't have a strong hearing then, but all the reasons listed for chuck hagel, none has to do with any pending issues before the pentagon. it has to do with he's been mean to president bush. he's been mean to john mccain. this process has said more about republicans than quite franklin it has said about chuck -- >> what about this issue of him -- is he going to be in charge of the pentagon? >> i think that is going to be the test for chuck hagel when he is sworn in fairly quickly and fairly soon as the next defe
't attack the president. they attacked nancy pelosi and harry reid. they avoided talking about -- >> but here, they have to go one on one with the president because he's the one that they're fighting with. it is not really harry reid and nancy pelosi leading the charge. >> bill: the other thing they say, we can absorb this. it won't be so bad. $1.2 trillion, that's over ten years. yet the pentagon comes out yesterday with a -- not with a study, they reported that they've already told 800,000 civilian employees you're going to face a furlough if this kicks in. that means they take one day a week off. that's a 20% cut in their pay. again, i'm trying to get in the mindset of republicans who think it is a good idea to let this happen. >> well, even unless -- if you look at the defense spending that we would go back, this would roughly be what the defense department was spending in 2006-2007 when they're waging two wars. maybe the defense department could cut back. the pentagon has never been able to do a full audit. it is risky because the white house put out a memo. i'm sure you s
and approve the senate nomination, harry reid said he'd like a full senate vote either wednesday or thursday. the armed services committee met this morning to look at the upcoming sequester. those automatic defense cuts set to happen march 1. and they heard from among others the chairman or the joint chiefs of the -- the chief of staff of the army, general ray odierno. >> the fiscal outlook, which the army faces in fiscal year threen and to my hodge -- 2013 and to my knowledge is dire and unprecedented. by the budget control act of 2011, the combination of the continuing resolution, a shortfall -- excuse me -- the -- a shortfall in overseas contingency operation funds for afghanistan and the sequester in fiscal year 2013 has resulted in a $17 billion to $18 billion shortfall to the army's operation and maintenance accounts. as well as an additional $6 billion cut to other programs. all of this will come in the remaining seven months of this year. the fiscal year 2013 fiscal situation will have grave and immediate readiness impacts by all forces not serving in afghanistan or forward in korea.
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)